All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) The lower court appears to have calculated a surcharge based on the Defendant’s statement made at the investigation agency of the investigative agency of the Defendant A, which included the monthly sales from KRW 4 million to KRW 6 million. However, the gross sales accrued from January 2018 to April 201 = KRW 13.8 million = KRW 2.5 million sales in February 2018: KRW 3.3 million in March 2018; KRW 5 million in April 3, 2018; KRW 5 million in April 2018, including the exchange sales generated from legitimate operation of the PC; KRW 10% of the total sales revenue (excluding the maximum sales revenue generated from KRW 13.8 million in terms of monthly rent, water rent, etc.; KRW 13.8 million in terms of the amount of monthly sales from January 2018; KRW 2.5 million in terms of the amount of unfair sentencing calculated based on the amount of annual sales generated by the Defendant’s lawful operation of the PC.

B. Defendant B’s penalty (2 million won) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on Defendant A’s grounds for appeal

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s duly admitted and investigated evidence, the lower court’s determination that sentenced Defendant A to KRW 16 million of a surcharge is justifiable, and thus, we cannot accept this part of the Defendant’s assertion.

1 Defendant A’s daily sales at an investigative agency are 200,000 won, and monthly sales are 40 million to 6 million won.

A relatively consistent statement was made to the effect that four persons are visiting 31 pages of investigation records and 34 pages of investigation records which are 200,000 won per day.

The defendant A.